Evaluation of image quality parameters of representative intraoral digital radiographic systems

Udupa, H. Nagaraja; Mah, Peter; Dove, S. Brent; McDavid, William D.

doi:10.1016/j.oooo.2013.08.019

Cited by 38 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Compare this with a standard computer monitor, which shows images with 256 shades of grey. 7 However, there is controversy regarding changes in observational conditions of digital radiography related to ambient-light levels [8][9][10][11][12][13] if the light interferes with any diagnostic performance owing to non-linearity of the photoreceptors responding to incremental stimuli related to a gain in overall luminance levels. 14 Thus, the aim of this study was to assess the perception of details in dental restorative composites of different radio-opacities under the influence of ambient light.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of low-contrast perceptibility in dental restorative materials under the influence of ambient light conditions

Cruz

Lobo²,

Lemos³

et al. 2015

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: This study aimed to assess how details on dental restorative composites with different radio-opacities are perceived under the influence of ambient light. Methods: Resin composite step wedges (six steps, each 1-mm thick) were custom manufactured from three materials, respectively: (M1) FiltekÔ Z350 (3M/ESPE, Saint Paul, MN); (M2) Prisma AP.HÔ (Dentsply International Inc., Brazil) and (M3) Glacier ® (SDI Limited, Victoria, Australia). Each step of the manufactured wedge received three standardized drillings of different diameters and depths. An aluminium (Al) step wedge with 12 steps (1-mm thick) was used as an internal standard to calculate the radio-opacity as pixel intensity values. Standardized digital images of the set were obtained, and 11 observers independently recorded the images, noting the number of noticeable details (drillings) under 2 dissimilar conditions: in a light environment (light was turned on in the room) and in lowlight conditions (light in the room was turned off). The differences between images in terms of the number of details that were observed were statistically compared using ANOVA, Cronbach's alpha coefficient and Wilcoxon and Kruskal-Wallis tests, with a significance level setting of 5% (a 5 0.05). Results: The M2 showed higher radio-opacity, the M1 displayed intermediate radio-opacity and the M3 showed lower radio-opacity, respectively; however, all three were without significance (p . 0.05) compared with each other. The differences in radio-opacity resulted in a significant variation (p , 0.05) in the number of noticeable details in the image, which were influenced by characteristics of details, in addition to the ambient-light level. Conclusions: The radio-opacity of materials and ambient light can affect the perception of details in digital radiographic images.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of low-contrast perceptibility in dental restorative materials under the influence of ambient light conditions

Cruz

Lobo²,

Lemos³

et al. 2015

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another hypothesis to explain the observed results lies in the spatial resolution, expressed by the number of line pairs (lp/mm) present in an image. In the case of intraoral radiographic images, the number of measured line pairs lies between 5 and 20 for most systems, 24,25 whereas for CBCT devices, the nominal spatial resolution may be up to 3 lp/mm. 26 Moreover, in reconstructing a CBCT image, the process of adding multiple scan acquisitions considers the mean value of each section, and therefore may mask hypodense areas when superimposing hyperdense ones.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic accuracy of cone beam computed tomography sections with various thicknesses for detecting misfit between the tooth and restoration in metal-restored teeth

Liedke

Spin‐Neto

Vizzotto

et al. 2015

Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology and Oral Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are four primary criteria to physical image quality, namely, contrast resolution, spatial resolution, dynamic range and noise. (Williams, 2007) (Mah, 2011) (Udupa, 2013) (Walker, 2013) Contrast resolution refers to the ability of the imaging modality to distinguish between differences in radiographic density, specifically the variation in shades of gray between dissimilar objects within the same image. (Lança, 2009) (Williams, 2007) These variations in luminance or gray levels make an object distinct.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of image sharpening on radiographic image quality

Clark

Wadhwani

Abramovitch

et al. 2018

The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Evaluation of image quality parameters of representative intraoral digital radiographic systems

Cited by 38 publications

References 29 publications

Evaluation of low-contrast perceptibility in dental restorative materials under the influence of ambient light conditions

Evaluation of low-contrast perceptibility in dental restorative materials under the influence of ambient light conditions

Diagnostic accuracy of cone beam computed tomography sections with various thicknesses for detecting misfit between the tooth and restoration in metal-restored teeth

Effect of image sharpening on radiographic image quality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About